Aid-in-dying laws and the physician's duty to inform

The Impact of Legalizing Medical Aid in Dying on Patient Trust: A Randomized Controlled Survey Study

Background: Some commentators and several professional medical associations have expressed concern that legalizing medical aid in dying ("MAID") will undermine patient trust in the medical profession, particularly among historically disadvantaged patient populations. While this concern remains influential, it has been subject to limited empirical scrutiny. Objectives: This study aims to empirically assess whether MAID legalization undermines patient trust, with considerations of potential trust/demographic correlations in marginalized and minority patient populations. Design: We developed an RCT survey study that assessed patients' trust in the medical professional using the Abbreviated Wake Forest Scale ("AWFS"). Two versions of the survey were used, each distributed at random to half of participants. One survey version included notification that MAID had been legalized in the jurisdiction where patients were receiving care and the other version omitted this information. Setting/Population: We surveyed capacitated, English-speaking adult patients who were receiving care at a not-for-profit, 912-bed academic and research hospital in Washington, D.C. Of those invited to participate, 494 patients (63.2%) completed all AWFS questions, and 70.1% identified as Black or African American and 32.9% as having a physical or mental disability. Conclusions: Most of the participants not notified that MAID was legal in DC were not aware of this fact (92.5%). Patients who were notified that MAID was legal in DC were significantly more likely to report approval of MAID legalization (p = 0.0410), but showed no significant difference in AWFS score for trust in their physicians. The study did not substantiate concerns that legalizing medical aid in dying undermines patient trust in the medical profession.

Barriers to connecting with the voluntary assisted dying system in Victoria, Australia: A qualitative mixed method study

INTRODUCTION

Voluntary assisted dying (VAD) is increasingly being legalised internationally. In Australia, all six states have now passed such laws, with Victoria being the first in 2019. However, early research in Victoria on the patient experience of seeking VAD shows that finding a connection to the VAD system is challenging. This study analyses the causes of this 'point of access' barrier.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with family caregivers and a person seeking VAD, with participants recruited via social media and patient interest groups. Data were thematically analysed. We also undertook documentary analysis (content and thematic) of publicly available reports from the oversight body, the Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board.

RESULTS

We interviewed 32 family caregivers and one patient across 28 interviews and analysed six Board reports. Finding a point of access to the VAD system was reported as challenging in both interviews and reports. Four specific barriers to connecting with the system were identified: (1) not knowing VAD exists as a legal option; (2) not recognising a person is potentially eligible for VAD; (3) not knowing next steps or not being able to achieve them in practice; and (4) challenges with patients being required to raise the topic of VAD because doctors are legally prohibited from doing so.

CONCLUSION

Legal, policy and practice changes are needed to facilitate patients being able to find a connection to the VAD system. The legal prohibition on doctors raising the topic of VAD should be repealed, and doctors and institutions who do not wish to be involved in VAD should be required to connect patients with appropriate contacts within the system. Community awareness initiatives are needed to enhance awareness of VAD, especially given it is relatively new in Victoria.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Families and a patient were the focus of this research and interviews with them about the experience of seeking VAD were the primary source of data analysed. This article includes their solutions to address the identified point of access barriers. Patient interest groups also supported the recruitment of participants.

Medical Assistance in Dying in Neurology

An increasing number of jurisdictions have legalized medical assistance in dying (MAID) with significant variation in the procedures and eligibility criteria used. In the United States, MAID is available for persons with terminal illnesses but is frequently sought by persons with neurologic conditions. Persons with conditions that cause cognitive impairment, such as Alzheimer dementia, are often ineligible for MAID, as their illness is not considered terminal in its early stages, whereas in later stages, they may have impaired decision-making capacity.

Voluntary stopping of eating and drinking in the age of medical assistance in dying: ethical considerations for physicians

Since 2016, when medical assistance in dying (MAiD) became legal in Canada, healthcare professionals (HCPs) have become familiar with exploring and acting upon patients’ wishes to hasten death (WTHD). In contrast to MAiD, the literature on the voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED) is very limited and there are no standards of practice or legal guidance to support HCPs. In this article, the legal and ethical literature as regards VSED is critically reviewed and new standards of practice are proposed.

How does Medical Assistance in Dying affect end-of-life care planning discussions? Experiences of Canadian multidisciplinary palliative care providers

Background

More than a dozen countries have now legalized some form of assisted dying, and additional jurisdictions are considering similar legislations or expanding eligibility criteria. Despite the persistent controversies about the relationship between medicine, palliative care, and assisted dying, many people are interested in assisted dying. Understanding how end-of-life care discussions between patients and specialist palliative care providers may be affected by such legislation can inform end-of-life care delivery in the evolving socio-cultural and legal environment.

Aim

To explore how the Canadian Medical Assistance in Dying legislation affects end-of-life care discussions between patients and multidisciplinary specialist palliative care providers.

Design

Qualitative thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews.

Participants

Forty-eight specialist palliative care providers from Vancouver (n = 26) and Toronto (n = 22) were interviewed in person or by phone. Participants included physicians (n = 22), nurses (n = 15), social workers (n = 7), and allied health professionals (n = 4).

Results

Qualitative thematic analysis identified five notable considerations associated with Medical Assistance in Dying affecting end-of-life care discussions: (1) concerns over having proactive conversations about the desire to hasten death, (2) uncertainties regarding wish-to-die statements, (3) conversation complexities around procedural matters, (4) shifting discussions about suffering and quality of life, and (5) the need and challenges of promoting open-ended discussions.

Conclusion

Medical Assistance in Dying challenges end-of-life care discussions and requires education and support for all concerned to enable compassionate health professional communication. It remains essential to address psychosocial and existential suffering in medicine, but also to provide timely palliative care to ensure suffering is addressed before it is deemed irremediable. Hence, clarification is required regarding assisted dying as an intervention of last resort. Furthermore, professional and institutional guidance needs to better support palliative care providers in maintaining their holistic standard of care.

Physicians' End of Life Discussions with Patients: Is There an Ethical Obligation to Discuss Aid in Dying?

Since Oregon implemented its Death with Dignity Act, many additional states have followed suit demonstrating a growing understanding and acceptance of aid in dying (AID) processes. Traditionally, the patient has been the one to request and seek this option out. However, as Death with Dignity acts continue to expand, it will impact the role of physicians and bring up questions over whether physicians have the ethical obligation to facilitate a conversation about AID with patients during end of life discussions. Patients have the right to make informed decisions about their health, which implies that physicians have an obligation to discuss with and inform patients of the options that will accomplish the patients' goals of care. We will argue that physicians have an ethical obligation to inform certain patients about AID (in qualifying states) during end of life care discussions. We will also address what this obligation encompasses and explore guidelines of when and how these conversations should occur and proceed. Earlier guidelines, presented by various palliative care and ethics experts, for proceeding with such conversations have mostly agreed that the discussion of hospice and end of life care with patients should be initiated early and that the individual goals of a patient during the remaining duration of life should be thoroughly examined before discussion of appropriate options. In discussing AID, physicians should never recommend but inform patients about the basics so that they can make an informed decision. If patients express further interest in AID, the physician should open up the dialogue to address the reasoning behind this decision versus other possible treatments to ensure that patients clearly comprehend the process and implications of their decision. Ultimately, any end of life choice should be made by patients with the full capacity to express what they envision for the remaining duration of life and to comprehend the advantages and disadvantages of all the possible options.

Oncologists and medical assistance in dying: where do we stand? Results of a national survey of Canadian oncologists

Background

In June 2016, when the Parliament of Canada passed Bill C-14, the country joined the small number of jurisdictions that have legalized medical assistance in dying (maid). Since legalization, nearly 7000 Canadians have received maid, most of whom (65%) had an underlying diagnosis of cancer. Although Bill C-14 specifies the need for government oversight and monitoring of maid, the government-collected data to date have tracked patient characteristics, rather than clinician encounters and beliefs. We aimed to understand the views of Canadian oncologists 2 years after the legalization of maid.

Methods

We developed and administered an online survey to medical and radiation oncologists to understand their exposure to maid, self-perceived knowledge, willingness to participate, and perception of the role of oncologists in introducing maid as an end-of-life care option. We used complete sampling through the Canadian Association of Medical Oncologists and the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology membership e-mail lists. The survey was sent to 691 physicians: 366 radiation oncologists and 325 medical oncologists. Data were collected during March-June 2018. Results are presented using descriptive statistics and univariate or multivariate analysis.

Results

The survey attracted 224 responses (response rate: 32.4%). Of the responding oncologists, 70% have been approached by patients requesting maid. Oncologists were of mixed confidence in their knowledge of the eligibility criteria. Oncologists were most willing to engage in maid with an assessment for eligibility, and yet most refer to specialized teams for assessments. In terms of introducing maid as an end-of-life option, slightly more than half the responding physicians (52.8%) would initiate a conversation about maid with a patient under certain circumstances, most commonly the absence of viable therapeutic options, coupled with unmanageable patient distress.

Conclusions

In this first national survey of Canadian oncologists about maid, we found that most respondents encounter patient requests for maid, are confident in their knowledge about eligibility, and are willing to act as assessors of eligibility. Many oncologists believe that, under some circumstances, it is appropriate to present maid as a therapeutic option at the end of life. That finding warrants further deliberation by national or regional bodies for the development of consensus guidelines to ensure equitable access to maid for patients who wish to pursue it.

Clinicians' Perspectives on the Duty to Inform Patients About Medical Aid-in-Dying

Background: As of 2019, ten jurisdictions in the United States have authorized physicians to prescribe a lethal dose of medication to a terminally ill patient for the purpose of hastening death. Relatively little bioethics scholarship has addressed the question of whether physicians have an obligation to inform qualifying patients about aid-in-dying (AID) in permissive jurisdictions and little is known about providers' actual communication practices with respect to this issue. Methods: One hundred and forty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted and analyzed using an inductive analytic approach as part of the Vermont Study on Aid-in-Dying. Results: Seventeen respondents, 14 physicians and 3 nurse practitioners, met the inclusion criteria for this sub-study. Eleven respondents indicated that they at least sometimes inform patients about AID. Respondents described multiple factors that influence whether or not they might initiate discussions of AID, including the importance of informing patients of their options for end-of-life care, worries about undue influence, and worries about the potential effects on the patient-provider relationship. For those providers who do initiate discussion of AID at least some of the time, attention to the particulars of each individual patient's situation and the context of the discussion appear to play a role in shaping communication about AID. Conclusions: While initiating a clinical discussion of AID is undoubtedly challenging, our study provides compelling descriptive evidence that some medical providers who support AID do not unilaterally follow the conventional bioethics wisdom holding that they ought to wait for patients to introduce the topic of AID. Future research should investigate how to approach these discussions so as to minimize ethical worries about undue influence or potential negative consequences.

Oncologists communicating with patients about assisted dying

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Across all jurisdictions in which assisted dying is legally permissible, cancer is the primary reported underlying diagnosis. Therefore, oncologists are likely to be asked about assisted dying and should be equipped to respond to inquiries or requests for assisted dying. Because Medical Assistance in Dying was legalized in Canada in 2016, it is a relatively new end-of-life practice and has prompted the need to revisit the academic literature to inform communication with patients about assisted dying.

RECENT FINDINGS

We reviewed applicable literature published in the past 5 years, pertaining to assisted dying and communication. In total, 86 articles were identified, 21 were flagged as relevant to review in detail, and six were included in the review. Key themes included perceived barriers and benefits to communicating with patients on the topic, pragmatic approaches for facilitating the conversation with patients, and the issue of proactively discussing assisted dying by broaching it as an option with patients.

SUMMARY

These findings indicate that there is still discomfort around having conversations about assisted dying with patients but new tools and approaches are being developed to support the practice.

Restricting conversations about voluntary assisted dying: implications for clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

On 19 June 2019, assisted dying became lawful in Victoria, the second most populous state in Australia. Section 8 of the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act is a legislative safeguard that is designed to ensure a patient's request for assistance to die is voluntary. This section prohibits health practitioners from initiating a conversation about assisted dying with the patient. This article explores the potential implications of this prohibition for effective communication between doctors and their patients, and the ability of doctors to provide high quality end-of-life (EOL) care in some cases.

METHOD

The authors reviewed and analysed literature on the importance of communication at the EOL including the need to understand and appropriately respond to Desire to Die or Desire to Hasten Death statements. A legal critique of section 8 of the Victorian Voluntary Assisted Dying Act was also undertaken to determine the scope of this new duty and how it aligns with existing legal obligations that would otherwise require doctors to provide information about EOL options requested by a patient.

RESULTS

Contemporary literature suggests that open and honest communication between doctor and patient including the provision of information about all EOL options when sought by the patient represents good clinical practice and will lead to optimal EOL care. The provision of such information also reflects professional, ethical and legal norms.

CONCLUSION

Despite (arguably) promoting an appropriate policy objective, the legislative prohibition on health professionals initiating conversations about voluntary assisted dying may, in cases where patients seek information about all EOL options, lead to less optimal patient outcomes.

Expanded definitions of the 'good death'? Race, ethnicity and medical aid in dying

The range of end-of-life options is expanding across North America. Specifically, medical aid in dying (AID), or the process by which a patient with a terminal illness may request medical assistance with hastening death, has recently become legal in eight jurisdictions in the United States and all of Canada. Debates about AID often rely on cultural constructions that define some deaths as 'good' and others as 'bad'. While research has found commonalities in how patients, family members and health care providers define good and bad deaths, these constructions likely vary across social groups. Because of this, the extent to which AID is seen as a route to the good death also likely varies across social groups. In this article, we analyse qualitative data from six focus groups (n = 39) across three racial and ethnic groups: African American, Latino and white Californians, just after a medical AID law was passed. We find that definitions of the 'good death' are nuanced within and between groups, suggesting that different groups evaluate medical AID in part through complex ideas about dying. These findings further conversations about racial and ethnic differences in choices about end-of-life options.

Medical Assistance in Dying at a paediatric hospital

This article explores the ethical challenges of providing Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) in a paediatric setting. More specifically, we focus on the theoretical questions that came to light when we were asked to develop a policy for responding to MAID requests at our tertiary paediatric institution. We illuminate a central point of conceptual confusion about the nature of MAID that emerges at the level of practice, and explore the various entailments for clinicians and patients that would flow from different understandings. Finally, we consider the ethical challenges of building policy on what is still an extremely controversial social practice. While MAID is currently available to capable patients in Canada who are 18 years or older-a small but important subsection of the population our hospital serves-we write our policy with an eye to the near future when capable young people may gain access to MAID. We propose that an opportunity exists for MAID-providing institutions to reduce social stigma surrounding this practice, but not without potentially serious consequences for practitioners and institutions themselves. Thus, this paper is intended as a road map through the still-emerging legal and ethical landscape of paediatric MAID. We offer a view of the roads taken and considered along the way, and our justifications for travelling the paths we chose. By providing a record of our in-progress thinking, we hope to stimulate wider discussion about the issues and questions encountered in this work.

End-of-Life Care Preferences in Patients with Severe and Persistent Mental Illness and Chronic Medical Conditions: A Comparative Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVES

Physicians rarely engage severe and persistent mental illness (SPMI) patients in end-of-life care discussion despite an increased risk of debilitating medical illnesses and mortality. Access to quality palliative care and medical assistance in dying (MAID) has become a priority in Canada and many jurisdictions. In this study, we compared SPMI and chronic medically ill (CMI) patients' end-of-life care preferences and comfort level with end-of-life care discussion, and identified potential predictors of interest in MAID.

DESIGN

Comparative cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Hospital-based.

PARTICIPANTS

We recruited 106 SPMI and 95 CMI patients at the Jewish General Hospital, Canada. Patients aged ≥40 years, without severe cognitive impairment, able to communicate in English or French and provide written informed consent were included.

MEASUREMENTS

Attitudes towards pain management, palliative sedation, MAID, and artificial life support were collected with the Health Care Preferences Questionnaire. Adjusted odd ratios (aOR) were calculated for each end-of-life care intervention. Comfort with discussion was rated on a Likert scale. A stepwise regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of interest in MAID.

RESULTS

SPMI was not correlated to any end-of-life care intervention, except for MAID where SPMI patients were less likely to support its use (aOR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.94, p = 0.03). Religiosity was also correlated with interest in MAID (aOR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06-0.31, p < 0.001). Patients in both groups were comfortable talking about end-of-life care.

CONCLUSIONS

SPMI patients are able to voice their end-of-life care preferences, and contrary to some fears, do not want MAID more than CMI patients.